Would you tell your family member that his belief system is an acceptable worldview and that it is his right to teach his children whatever he wants to…or would you tell him that he is certifiably nuts and that what he is doing to his children is shameful, ignorant, and immoral?
If I had the chance to discuss my opinions with this family member, I would certainly share them. My opinion is that no child should be indoctrinated with beliefs as though they were truths. It doesn’t matter whether it is santa claus, jesus, leprechauns or the easter bunny. Children should be allowed to think for themselves, period.
But I don’t take offence easily, and I’m quite happy to put all that behind me.
Good for you UnkleE. I do object to all of the ad hominem statements. I look at it this way: If the best someone can do is insult you then all they are really doing is displaying just how shallow they are.
Hi Ark, thanks for your interest in my views. But there is one little matter to settle first. I made a few things clear:
“I’m quite happy to answer any question as part of a reasonable discussion – but as I said before, I’m not going to waste my time or yours doing the research to find the facts and then explaining my conclusions from the facts, if those genuine comments are met with mockery, misunderstanding or misrepresentation, or if the other person isn’t really interested in unbiased facts.”
“I don’t know why any of you would particularly want to discuss with me, but if you actually do, let’s agree on some ground rules – basically what Dave and Nate have said … [not] unhelpfully personal or ugly …. [but] friendly and courteous … like normal friendly human beings.”
Are you agreeing to totally give up comments that don’t meet these ground rules?
“Good for you UnkleE. I do object to all of the ad hominem statements. I look at it this way: If the best someone can do is insult you then all they are really doing is displaying just how shallow they are.”
Thanks again Dave. I agree.How can we say we have rational beliefs if our behaviour shows otherwise?
Couldn’t Moses still have been a historical figure even if the exodus story was blown out of proportion?
From reading the biblical narrative, Moses’ sole function is as a Superhero picked by Yahweh to lead the Israelites out of Egypt to settle the promised land. And, of course, along the way, climb a mountain, meet Yahweh and pick up a couple of tablets to ensure he now had a better Life Guide than one suggested by either Tony Robbins or Rhonda Byrne.
He doesn’t even get to enter the promised land but is ”killed off” allowing Joshua to take the reigns and butcher his way across Canaan.
So just what would be the point of Moses being an historical figure?
Martin Noth once proposed that he was an amalgamation of Israelite characters but even this hypothesis was eventually rejected.
Why is it so difficult to think that there were writers in such times who could ”pen” ( chisel?) a fantasy story as good -and certainly as bloodthirsty – as anything Tolkein could have dreamed up?
But don’t ask me. Direct your question to the millions of Jews and others who now consider him as made up as Bilbo Baggins.
From reading the biblical narrative, Moses’ sole function is as a Superhero picked by Yahweh to lead the Israelites out of Egypt to settle the promised land.
Perhaps you’re right. I was thinking about how the story includes so many names, like the family record for Moses and Aaron in Exodus 6. Now that I’m looking back at it, it looks like someone inserted the genealogy afterwards. It actually breaks right into the middle of a conversation and causes Moses to repeat himself almost word-for-word before and after it. The beginning of the story did not include the names of Moses’ parents so perhaps someone else wanted to improve it.
Unklee I see no problems with your conditions, am just wondering why you think it is necessary to have such a caveat.
I only have a few questions. Do you believe in miracles because they are in the bible? What do you think of Mo’s journey from Mecca, to Jerusalem to heaven and back aboard a Pegasus? Do you think it is believable? Why not?
Do you consider the Koran divinely inspired scripture? Why not?
When you examine the text critically the obvious truth becomes plain.
The problem Christians are having accepting this is the obvious devastating impact it has on the character, Jesus of Nazareth.
I realise we do not know each other from soap, but if you can appreciate that this topic has been raised often enough with unklee and others that the frustration of them avoiding it as much as possible does tend to boil over.
Once one is prepared to accept that the Pentateuch is simply historical fiction the ”expert” consensus regarding Jesus becomes just a little more difficult to swallow and it soon become apparent that any genuine Old Testament /New Testament scholarly harmonization becomes impossible. Somewhat like the nursery rhyme that ends … and ne’er the twain shall meet.
Once one is prepared to accept that the Pentateuch is simply historical fiction the ”expert” consensus regarding Jesus becomes just a little more difficult to swallow and it soon become apparent that any genuine Old Testament /New Testament scholarly harmonization becomes impossible. Somewhat like the nursery rhyme that ends … and ne’er the twain shall meet.
Hey Ark-
I assume you have, or know of some reputable person who has, used some fictional character or narrative or statement that would provide concise summary or drive home a point to a particular person or group of people. Imagine you use a quote from Shakespeare to drive home a truth about something, or, as many non-Christians I know do, you use a lesson Jesus taught or statement he made to uphold some point on morality you are trying to make. I don’t know if you’ve ever done either, but I know many people who use fictional quotations to make points. If that is acceptable, which I find a hard time believing you’d disagree with, how, then, could Jesus using teachings from the OT that may be either fictional or over-exaggerated be out of the bounds? You seem to be arguing that his use of OT accounts, that might be fictional, nullifies any credence we might have been able to give him. I don’t see that is the case. I know you have many other problems with Christianity and the NT, but I believe Jesus could have legitimately used fictional OT stories (as Christians have long known he did with Job and probably Jonah, for instance) to make a point to his listeners, and that does not necessarily nullify his authority or his existence.
I’d like to hear the answer to mugatu’s questions.
I often wonder how people can continue in belief once they’re shown the issues. My belief crumble so quickly after I finally saw them.
I suspect that there is something inside them that make them think there is something invisible that binds everything in the universe (and beyond?) together. They see everything in existence, and think that something made that order… of course, they must keep from asking why their creator doesnt need creation or design, or they make some special rule for their creator or designer, and fail to consider that if one can invent any new rule or possibility for their invisible “start” or creator, then why cant anyone else do the same, conveniently explaining their position.
I think they also are compelled by a hope for eternity. maybe even a lack in ability to fathom nothingness or an end ( I think that nothingness is probably best imagined by recalling what it was like before you were born).
But I also imagine fear, coupled with the above, is a motivator. fear of rejection. fear of being condemned for an honest mistake. fear of being alone, without a cosmic daddy or guardian angel to watch over them. fear of hell.
of course, to those who claim to have witnessed real miracles, then i can see where that’s compelling, but unless they come with explicit directions or message, how do they know they are attributing it to the right deity? and if they find miracles so compelling, then wouldnt understand why there are those who dont believe without seeing or witnessing any?
but like nate, i can live with cool people, regardless of their belief. Are they good neighbors, do they at least keep from harming others? I’m down with that, and dont feel the need to force doubt upon them. just like I dont go around telling all children that there is no santa, or like I wouldnt tell a die soldier that his best friend also died, or that he’s not going to make it. We make cocessions in truth all the time, so see no need to force what i think is true on everyone. I’ll discuss it, and am fine with the discussion – and try not to be upset by the result.
I’m looking for truth and hope others do as well. I can make only myself look deeper, question more honestly. I’ll try not to worry about what others do with their own reflection… although it is chore at times.
Josh, maybe jesus is a fictional construct created to illustrated how better man can be and should strive to be. maybe it is all just a parable and none of it is literal… or even truly inspired by god,
William, I am going to run you over for doing such injustice to my name 🙂
Josh, I don’t think you understand Ark’s question. As an author, I think he can answer for himself, but here we have claims that Jesus was/is god. Why would a god knowing the OT characters were mythical refer to them and even claim to have been with them at the transfiguration unless he meant to deceive and not correct their wrong beliefs? Ark you can correct me if I misunderstand your question.
“I find a hard time believing you’d disagree with, how, then, could Jesus using teachings from the OT that may be either fictional or over-exaggerated be out of the bounds?”
Not answering for Ark, Josh, just voicing my own opinion – when I use Aesop, or Shakespeare, or whomever to illustrate a point, and I have, it’s because everyone I’m addressing KNOWS that the Shakespearean characters are fictional, other wise I would clarify, “As Shakespear said in ‘King Lear’ —” Had Yeshua identified Moses as a fictional character to his audience, I would have had no problem with that. However IF Yeshua had lived, and IF Yeshua had referred to Moses (and there’s no evidence for either), then it would appear that Yeshua believed that Moses was as real as did his audience, which rather lessens his claims of divinity.
Why would a god knowing the OT characters were mythical refer to them and even claim to have been with them at the transfiguration unless he meant to deceive and not correct their wrong beliefs?
Maybe he wasn’t primarily concerned with whether they knew Moses was actually a real, historical person? Maybe he was more concerned with overturning their beliefs about who God is rather than arguing history with them?
Arch-
I see your point. I don’t’ necessarily agree that, to make his point, he had to identify Moses as a fictional character. I think we often use stories and other types of fiction to make points to people. I’m thinking as a social worker (my job 🙂 communicating things to children or adults who have limited mental capacity, and using a lot of parable and fiction to get across truths about the world they may not understand if I were to engage on a much higher intellectual plane. I don’t see it as out of the question that Jesus simply glossed it over because it didn’t matter whether they believed Moses was a real person or not, it was the point he was making that was important.
Finding Truth 
If I had the chance to discuss my opinions with this family member, I would certainly share them. My opinion is that no child should be indoctrinated with beliefs as though they were truths. It doesn’t matter whether it is santa claus, jesus, leprechauns or the easter bunny. Children should be allowed to think for themselves, period.
LikeLike
Good for you UnkleE. I do object to all of the ad hominem statements. I look at it this way: If the best someone can do is insult you then all they are really doing is displaying just how shallow they are.
LikeLike
@Ark
Couldn’t Moses still have been a historical figure even if the exodus story was blown out of proportion?
LikeLike
Hi Ark, thanks for your interest in my views. But there is one little matter to settle first. I made a few things clear:
“I’m quite happy to answer any question as part of a reasonable discussion – but as I said before, I’m not going to waste my time or yours doing the research to find the facts and then explaining my conclusions from the facts, if those genuine comments are met with mockery, misunderstanding or misrepresentation, or if the other person isn’t really interested in unbiased facts.”
“I don’t know why any of you would particularly want to discuss with me, but if you actually do, let’s agree on some ground rules – basically what Dave and Nate have said … [not] unhelpfully personal or ugly …. [but] friendly and courteous … like normal friendly human beings.”
Are you agreeing to totally give up comments that don’t meet these ground rules?
LikeLike
“Good for you UnkleE. I do object to all of the ad hominem statements. I look at it this way: If the best someone can do is insult you then all they are really doing is displaying just how shallow they are.”
Thanks again Dave. I agree.How can we say we have rational beliefs if our behaviour shows otherwise?
LikeLike
Most certainly, providing you answer truthfully, confronting the questions with honesty and integrity showing no ambiguity and no sidestepping.
Do this and you have my word.
LikeLike
@Dave
From reading the biblical narrative, Moses’ sole function is as a Superhero picked by Yahweh to lead the Israelites out of Egypt to settle the promised land. And, of course, along the way, climb a mountain, meet Yahweh and pick up a couple of tablets to ensure he now had a better Life Guide than one suggested by either Tony Robbins or Rhonda Byrne.
He doesn’t even get to enter the promised land but is ”killed off” allowing Joshua to take the reigns and butcher his way across Canaan.
So just what would be the point of Moses being an historical figure?
Martin Noth once proposed that he was an amalgamation of Israelite characters but even this hypothesis was eventually rejected.
Why is it so difficult to think that there were writers in such times who could ”pen” ( chisel?) a fantasy story as good -and certainly as bloodthirsty – as anything Tolkein could have dreamed up?
But don’t ask me. Direct your question to the millions of Jews and others who now consider him as made up as Bilbo Baggins.
LikeLike
While we are on the subject….what happened to Kathy?
Kathy is on twitter, bullying liberals.
defending cops that kill unarmed black men and defending the sanctity of traditional marriage.
LikeLike
Just in case anyone woke up grumpy this morning, here’s the cure:
LikeLiked by 1 person
Perhaps you’re right. I was thinking about how the story includes so many names, like the family record for Moses and Aaron in Exodus 6. Now that I’m looking back at it, it looks like someone inserted the genealogy afterwards. It actually breaks right into the middle of a conversation and causes Moses to repeat himself almost word-for-word before and after it. The beginning of the story did not include the names of Moses’ parents so perhaps someone else wanted to improve it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Unklee I see no problems with your conditions, am just wondering why you think it is necessary to have such a caveat.
I only have a few questions. Do you believe in miracles because they are in the bible? What do you think of Mo’s journey from Mecca, to Jerusalem to heaven and back aboard a Pegasus? Do you think it is believable? Why not?
Do you consider the Koran divinely inspired scripture? Why not?
LikeLike
@ Dave
When you examine the text critically the obvious truth becomes plain.
The problem Christians are having accepting this is the obvious devastating impact it has on the character, Jesus of Nazareth.
I realise we do not know each other from soap, but if you can appreciate that this topic has been raised often enough with unklee and others that the frustration of them avoiding it as much as possible does tend to boil over.
Once one is prepared to accept that the Pentateuch is simply historical fiction the ”expert” consensus regarding Jesus becomes just a little more difficult to swallow and it soon become apparent that any genuine Old Testament /New Testament scholarly harmonization becomes impossible. Somewhat like the nursery rhyme that ends … and ne’er the twain shall meet.
LikeLike
Hey Ark-
I assume you have, or know of some reputable person who has, used some fictional character or narrative or statement that would provide concise summary or drive home a point to a particular person or group of people. Imagine you use a quote from Shakespeare to drive home a truth about something, or, as many non-Christians I know do, you use a lesson Jesus taught or statement he made to uphold some point on morality you are trying to make. I don’t know if you’ve ever done either, but I know many people who use fictional quotations to make points. If that is acceptable, which I find a hard time believing you’d disagree with, how, then, could Jesus using teachings from the OT that may be either fictional or over-exaggerated be out of the bounds? You seem to be arguing that his use of OT accounts, that might be fictional, nullifies any credence we might have been able to give him. I don’t see that is the case. I know you have many other problems with Christianity and the NT, but I believe Jesus could have legitimately used fictional OT stories (as Christians have long known he did with Job and probably Jonah, for instance) to make a point to his listeners, and that does not necessarily nullify his authority or his existence.
LikeLike
I’d like to hear the answer to mugatu’s questions.
I often wonder how people can continue in belief once they’re shown the issues. My belief crumble so quickly after I finally saw them.
I suspect that there is something inside them that make them think there is something invisible that binds everything in the universe (and beyond?) together. They see everything in existence, and think that something made that order… of course, they must keep from asking why their creator doesnt need creation or design, or they make some special rule for their creator or designer, and fail to consider that if one can invent any new rule or possibility for their invisible “start” or creator, then why cant anyone else do the same, conveniently explaining their position.
I think they also are compelled by a hope for eternity. maybe even a lack in ability to fathom nothingness or an end ( I think that nothingness is probably best imagined by recalling what it was like before you were born).
But I also imagine fear, coupled with the above, is a motivator. fear of rejection. fear of being condemned for an honest mistake. fear of being alone, without a cosmic daddy or guardian angel to watch over them. fear of hell.
of course, to those who claim to have witnessed real miracles, then i can see where that’s compelling, but unless they come with explicit directions or message, how do they know they are attributing it to the right deity? and if they find miracles so compelling, then wouldnt understand why there are those who dont believe without seeing or witnessing any?
but like nate, i can live with cool people, regardless of their belief. Are they good neighbors, do they at least keep from harming others? I’m down with that, and dont feel the need to force doubt upon them. just like I dont go around telling all children that there is no santa, or like I wouldnt tell a die soldier that his best friend also died, or that he’s not going to make it. We make cocessions in truth all the time, so see no need to force what i think is true on everyone. I’ll discuss it, and am fine with the discussion – and try not to be upset by the result.
I’m looking for truth and hope others do as well. I can make only myself look deeper, question more honestly. I’ll try not to worry about what others do with their own reflection… although it is chore at times.
LikeLike
Josh, maybe jesus is a fictional construct created to illustrated how better man can be and should strive to be. maybe it is all just a parable and none of it is literal… or even truly inspired by god,
LikeLike
“Kathy is on twitter” – The perfect place for a twit.
LikeLike
William, I am going to run you over for doing such injustice to my name 🙂
Josh, I don’t think you understand Ark’s question. As an author, I think he can answer for himself, but here we have claims that Jesus was/is god. Why would a god knowing the OT characters were mythical refer to them and even claim to have been with them at the transfiguration unless he meant to deceive and not correct their wrong beliefs? Ark you can correct me if I misunderstand your question.
LikeLike
“Somewhat like the nursery rhyme that ends … and ne’er the twain shall meet” I believe that’s Kipling —
LikeLike
arch now after you have written
I may just have to consider closing my twitter account.
@william your comment to Josh is so spot on.
LikeLike
sorry, Makagutu about the name thing. I couldnt resist. every time I see your name I think of Will Farrell’s character on Zoolander…
LikeLike
“I find a hard time believing you’d disagree with, how, then, could Jesus using teachings from the OT that may be either fictional or over-exaggerated be out of the bounds?”
Not answering for Ark, Josh, just voicing my own opinion – when I use Aesop, or Shakespeare, or whomever to illustrate a point, and I have, it’s because everyone I’m addressing KNOWS that the Shakespearean characters are fictional, other wise I would clarify, “As Shakespear said in ‘King Lear’ —” Had Yeshua identified Moses as a fictional character to his audience, I would have had no problem with that. However IF Yeshua had lived, and IF Yeshua had referred to Moses (and there’s no evidence for either), then it would appear that Yeshua believed that Moses was as real as did his audience, which rather lessens his claims of divinity.
LikeLike
Maybe he wasn’t primarily concerned with whether they knew Moses was actually a real, historical person? Maybe he was more concerned with overturning their beliefs about who God is rather than arguing history with them?
LikeLike
Sorry – “alleged” claims —
LikeLike
and Josh since you raise it, what did he tell them about god different from what Moses is alleged to have told them?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Arch-
I see your point. I don’t’ necessarily agree that, to make his point, he had to identify Moses as a fictional character. I think we often use stories and other types of fiction to make points to people. I’m thinking as a social worker (my job 🙂 communicating things to children or adults who have limited mental capacity, and using a lot of parable and fiction to get across truths about the world they may not understand if I were to engage on a much higher intellectual plane. I don’t see it as out of the question that Jesus simply glossed it over because it didn’t matter whether they believed Moses was a real person or not, it was the point he was making that was important.
LikeLike